[Bobolink]

This question is for proponents of the existence of galaxies.

You're denying the existence of galaxies? Seriously?

I do not just deny, I prove, based on facts.

So this thing doesn't exist???

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

This thing exists, but it’s not a galaxy, but a cyclone or anticyclone that creates sunlight.

[Colin2B]

This thing exists, but it is not a galaxy, but a solar light cyclone.

You cannot be serious. I assume this a mistranslation of galaxy from Russian!

Care to explain what is causing the lights? If you say stars, then it’s a galaxy.

[Bobolink]

This thing exists, but it’s not a galaxy, but a cyclone or anticyclone that creates sunlight.

I assume you know that there is a great amount of evidence that directly refutes your idea.  Do you have any evidence to support this idea?

[Kryptid]

This thing exists, but it’s not a galaxy, but a cyclone or anticyclone that creates sunlight.

Cyclones exist in an atmosphere. There is no atmosphere in space.

[The Spoon]

The OP seems to be competing with himself to say ever more stupid things.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

This thing exists, but it’s not a galaxy, but a cyclone or anticyclone that creates sunlight.

Do you have any evidence to support this idea?

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy.
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?
http://www.astro.caltech.edu/ay1/Ay1_main.html

[Kryptid]

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy.
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Why have you consistently ignored our explanations for this? I've already provided you with two examples of naturally-occurring circumpolar orbits.

I'm also waiting for you to provide even the tiniest bit of evidence that stars "hang above the poles of the galaxy". In order for you to do that, you would need to provide evidence that those stars do not move. So go ahead and give us that evidence. Snap to it!

[Bored chemist]

Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Imagine a planet in orbit round the pole star.
From here, it would look like it was stationary over the pole.

[The Spoon]

This thing exists, but it’s not a galaxy, but a cyclone or anticyclone that creates sunlight.

Do you have any evidence to support this idea?

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy.
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?
http://www.astro.caltech.edu/ay1/Ay1_main.html

You do realise that repeating the same nonsense does not make it true?

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Imagine a planet in orbit round the pole star.
From here, it would look like it was stationary over the pole.

You write nonsense.

[Kryptid]

You write nonsense.

Pot, meet kettle.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Imagine a planet in orbit round the pole star.
From here, it would look like it was stationary over the pole.

If the planet revolves around a polar star, it will not be able to hang above the pole of a polar star.
And you can watch wherever you want.

[Kryptid]

If the planet revolves around a polar star, it will not be able to hang above the pole of a polar star.

You have yet to present any evidence that anything hangs above the pole of anything else, so it's a moot point.

[The Spoon]

Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Imagine a planet in orbit round the pole star.
From here, it would look like it was stationary over the pole.

If the planet revolves around a polar star, it will not be able to hang above the pole of a polar star.
And you can watch wherever you want.

You do realise that the pole star is apparent over the pole of this planet and it is not universal through the galaxy?

[The Spoon]

Can the planet hang motionless above the pole of the sun?

Imagine a planet in orbit round the pole star.
From here, it would look like it was stationary over the pole.

You write nonsense.

And what do you think the crap you post is?

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy?
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Whether the planet can hang motionless, above the pole of the sun. http://www.astro.caltech.edu/ay1/Ay1_main.html

No one can answer this question.

[Bored chemist]

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy?
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Whether the planet can hang motionless, above the pole of the sun. http://www.astro.caltech.edu/ay1/Ay1_main.html

No one can answer this question.

Several people have answered it.
You don't seem to pay attention.

[The Spoon]

1. Stars hang above the poles of the galaxy?
a) Without a doubt, this is levitation and contradicts elementary logic.
b) Whether the planet can hang motionless, above the pole of the sun. http://www.astro.caltech.edu/ay1/Ay1_main.html

No one can answer this question.

You keep making this claim. Are you really that ignorant?

[Kryptid]

No one can answer this question.

No one else ever said that stars hang over the poles of the galaxy. You are the only one to make that claim. You also never provided any evidence for it. So the burden of proof is on you, not us.